Linuxers September 2002

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

92 participants
165 discussions

[OT] http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in
by Amish Mehta 27 Sep '02

27 Sep '02

Hello, http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/ gives page not found. I think it should atleast redirect to http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers Thanks. Amish.

2 1

An Interesting Question
by Bhargav Bhatt 27 Sep '02

27 Sep '02

Hello Luggers! I will play the Devil's Advocate here. Consider, for a moment, that the folloing *HYPOTHETICAL* situation is true. Microsoft Corp. has been losing market value rapidly(but it still is the number 1 software company) due to the advancement a much more "stable" and "secure" operating system called GNU/Linux. Since the GNU/Linux operating system, licensed under the GPL is completely open source, *anybody* is allowed to *see* the code. Lets say that Microsoft, to stay at the top, employs a few developers who are skilled at both GNU/Linux and Windows. Microsoft, then asks them to write a clone of the linux kernel for incorporating large chunks of it, maybe even the kernel in its entirety, into the next version of windows. Since M$ is the still the leader, they have the highest market share. Now if almost everybody switches to the new version of windows(based on the linux kernel), they will be in for a pleasant surprise. They will now get a much more stable and secure OS, which unknown to them, is running a replica of the linux kernel. This new OS will please major IT companies, using M$, too, as they will not have scratch their heads over switching to a more stable operating environment. This will mean an increasing demand for the now, stable and secure, OS from Microsoft. Since all patches applied to OSS are open too, M$ can easily incorporate those into windows update. M$ in the meanwhile, does NOT disclose to *anyone* the ingredients of the new OS. Thus M$ keeps making more money, and its market grows, thereby condemning GNU/Linux to realms of geeks, where it had its humble beginnings. Since M$ does not disclose source code, there is no way for others(Read GNU/Linux supporters) to make a claim that the new Windows is a rip off of the Linux kernel. My question is, (discounting the ethical and moral concerns as these cant be counted as legal arguments and assuming that M$ pays enough $$ to the developers to keep their mouth shut) what contract/law/clause/license/etc is there right now to prevent M$ from doing something as dastardly as this? P.S: i dont think that the GPL can be used at M$ is too smart at code obfuscation(i think it means obscuring source code) for people to be able to disassemble their OS and claim it to be a rip-off of linux. Bhargav Bhatt, Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics, Columbia University. --------------- Is it a co-incidence that Red Hat and Robin Hood share the same initials?

4 3

sendmail problem
by Girish Hanchate 27 Sep '02

27 Sep '02

Do masquerading or if u r using proxy open POP3 port in squid. rgds girish i need suggestion from u, theres some configuration problem i h've setup linux 7.3 Redhat with iptables firewall, n squid proxy server now i want to configure sendmail as a mail server for internal lan user the requirement is users from lan should able to send mails through windows machine with the help of outlook express, i already have a pop3 address for receiving mails from internet for example xyz.com, so receiving is not a problem but i need to configure my gateway such a way that user from lan (windows 98 / 2000 + outlook express installed ) should able to send mails to anyone from outlook express through gatway. pls tell me abt this from scratch that how should i setup sendmail to do this task, i dont h've any registered domain name i h've 64 kbps leased line with static ip n isp dns if i use mail programme on gateway to send mails to xyz(a)yahoo.com it works now i want same thing should happen from client machine i h've done SNAT on some machines Thanx Satsonic __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com

1 0

sendmail problem
by Girish Hanchate 27 Sep '02

27 Sep '02

Do masquerading or if u r using proxy open POP3 port in squid. rgds giris i need suggestion from u, theres some configuration problem i h've setup linux 7.3 Redhat with iptables firewall, n squid proxy server now i want to configure sendmail as a mail server for internal lan user the requirement is users from lan should able to send mails through windows machine with the help of outlook express, i already have a pop3 address for receiving mails from internet for example xyz.com, so receiving is not a problem but i need to configure my gateway such a way that user from lan (windows 98 / 2000 + outlook express installed ) should able to send mails to anyone from outlook express through gatway. pls tell me abt this from scratch that how should i setup sendmail to do this task, i dont h've any registered domain name i h've 64 kbps leased line with static ip n isp dns if i use mail programme on gateway to send mails to xyz(a)yahoo.com it works now i want same thing should happen from client machine i h've done SNAT on some machines Thanx Satsonic __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com

1 0

Anti-Simputer article...
by Frederick Noronha 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

More on the anti-Simputer article... Very relevant to the GNU/Linux debate too. FN From: "Vinay L Deshpande" <vinay(a)ncoretech.com> On the India-GII list Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 4:28 PM Subject: [india-gii] Reply to Scott McCollum on his article on Simputer Dear Pete: Thanks for forwarding this to me; it shows me that there ARE people who do not yet understand what the Simputer really is -- the Trust and we all need to do more to dispel misconceptions. I do hope my reply to Scott McCollum, appended below, will help clear his misconceptions. Best regards, Vinay QUOTE Dear Scott: Your September 19 article in the World TechTribune (http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/asparticles/buzz/bz09192002) on how the Simputer will NOT bridge the digital divide, has just come to my attention, and I do feel you should have talked to the developers as well as some of the actual users, to get a better understanding of the product, before pontificating about something that you clearly do not understamd. Typical of some in the developed world to pretend that since they are from the developed world, they know better than the "natives." Allow me to clear your misconceptions: You said, "It's a cheap handheld that runs non standard software which will not help to bridge the digital divide." First of all, it is not cheap, it is simply inexpensive. Cheap today signifies low quality, whereas the Simputer is a high-quality product that uses state-of-the-art technology and components. Secondly, it is based on very standard software, as it uses the GNU/Linux operating system, which cannot be termed as non-standard by any stretch of the imagination, unless your definition of standard is Windows, WindowsCE, PalmOS, or Symbian. Further, the Information Markup Language (IML) that has been newly created for the Simputer, is in reality an XML application, and XML, again, cannot be termed non-standard by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, Microsoft, whose software you will perhaps agree is a standard, are promoting XML as an internet standard. Nevertheless, using the Simputer's SDK, programs can also be written in C, which is a current standard. Also, J2ME is now available on the Simputer, and J2ME, you will hopefully agree, is yet another current standard. The interfaces that the Simputer uses, such as USBn audio, IrDA, and V.90 modem, are also current standards. You then say, "by teaching an illiterate nomad how to use a computer that only other illiterate nomads use, they are not helping to bridge that digital divide," and "How can anyone honestly expect developing nations to ever help themselves if the Simputer doesn't actually teach them how the rest of the world really works?" It is rather presumptuous to think that the Simputer is only aimed at the illiterate, and further that all illiterates are nomads. What the Simputer does do, is to enable even illiterates, and yes, even the nomads among them, to use information technology as a tool to do things that matter to them, including accessing the internet for information at least in their own language, which the Simputer speaks to them using its built-in local-language text-to-speech facility. Admittedly, since they may not know English which you probably consider the only standard language, the Simputer may not just yet be able to teach them everything about how the rest of the world works, as some of that information content may not currently be available in their local language. But I dare say that there is a lot of material already available in many non-English local languages, in India as well as in other developing countries, which is still accessible to them. This we consider a good first step in bridging the digital divide. Besides, aren't use of handheld devices and internet access part of "how the rest of the world works?" By the way, hunt and peck is also how many in the "rest of the world" work, but I dare say that the illiterate nomads touching pictorial icons is hardly hunt-and-peck. In any case, a not-too-distant version of the Simputer will allow these illiterate nomads to use spoken commands in their own language, obviating the need for hunt-and-peck. As for illiterate nomads interacting with other illiterate nomads, aren't most of the interactions that any individual has, anywhere in the world, with other individuals in their local area(s)? Local here could mean a village, town, city, state, or even country. For that matter, it doesn't seem like you yourself cared to interact with the developers of the Simputer, half way around the world, to learn the facts about it, before jumping to your own ill-judged conclusions, so why should you expect the illiterate nomads to not derive any value by interacting with other illiterate nomads? Now, let's talk about applications. True, users must wait for someone to develop a specialized application and distribute it before they can enjoy the Simputer. But this is also true of any other standard handheld device if anyone in the developed world too needs an application that is outside the standard suite of PIM applications. Yes, a lot of specialized application software is available on many web sites for the standard handheld devices currently available in the market, but didn't users of such devices have to wait when such devices initially appeared, to have them written by some developer(s) ? Why should the Simputer be any different? In fact, there is already an army of independent developers, worldwide, which is creating many innovative applications on the Simputer, for bridging the digital divide, that have real meaning to the lives of those illiterate nomads as well as their literate counterparts in the cities and towns in the developing and developed worlds. One example is a Simputer-based ultrasound device to help government health workers monitor the health of mother and foetus among the aboriginal women in the remote villages of Africa where there is no electricity available for using standard ultrasound diagnostic equipment used in urban-area clinics or hospitals. That is bridging the digital divide, by passing on the benefits of modern digital technology to poor tribals in caring for their health. You finally say, "the most glaringly obvious problem of the Simputer is trumpeted as one of its greatest qualities: portability," as such portability would make the Simputer vulnerable to easy theft. No one can deny that the human temptation to steal exists among all peoples of the world, whether they live in developed countries or the developing ones. Why else would computer stores everywhere, including the developed world, do brisk business in those lockable tethers which they also use in-store, attached to laptops and handheld devices on display? The real point that you seem to have missed, is that by virtue of the smart-card facility, the Simputer can be shared among a group of persons who can't individually afford even the low $200 price, while still retaining the privacy of their data and other information. And because of such shared ownership, there will be greater care exercised to prevent theft(s). The same would be true of even Simputers which are placed in a village, say, by the government or even by "progressives" from the West, which, being community property, will be jealously guarded by the community! As for the Simputers that would be in a cyber-cafe-like Simputer Cafe in the village, the owner of the Cafe will have adequate preventive measures instituted against theft. All this does not mean that theft will be totally impossible, but it also doesn't mean that because of the likelihood of theft owing to its portability, the Simputer is not suited for use by those poor villagers. For that matter, the same poor villagers possess small, easy-to-carry or -pocket items such as traditional jewellery, farm implements, utensils, etc., which do once in a while get stolen, but which they do normally know how to protect from theft, so why should the Simputer be any different? I am afraid you do need to educate yourself, Scott. Best regards, Vinay Deshpande Managing Trustee The Simputer Trust ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Oram" <andyo(a)oreilly.com> To: <india-gii(a)lists.cpsr.org> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 5:38 PM Subject: [india-gii] Critique of Simputer > > The following article (which came to me across another > > mailing list) is worth reading carefully. It would be easy > > to sneer at. ("You're doing nobody a favor by giving them a > > graphical interface and a mouse. They've got to learn > > command-line utilities like everybody else.") The arguments > > are not presented as well as they could be, in my > > opinion. But there are several cogent arguments, somewhat > > hidden. > > > > SIMPUTERS: WHEN TECHNOLOGY DOES _NOT_ BRIDGE THE DIGITAL DIVIDE > > [SOURCE: World Tech Tribune, AUTHOR: Scott McCollum] http://www.worldtechtribune.com/worldtechtribune/asparticles/buzz/bz0919200… > > I would rephrase--and answer--McCollum's objections as > > follows: > > > > 1. Because the Simputer must use non-standard interfaces and > > applications, users must wait for someone to develop a > > specialized application and distribute it before they can > > enjoy it. > > > > Answer: this limitation sets the bar somewhat higher than > > other devices, but other users also need, for the most > > part, to wait for someone to develop a service or web > > site with the material they want. But even limited to > > Simputers, a county government or local business that > > sees a need could hire a programmer to code up an > > application and put it on a smart card. The barrier is > > still pretty low. > > > > 2. Simputer applications allow Simputer users to talk to > > each other. But there's a much wider world they need > > access to. > > > > Answer: A lot of research suggests that local > > interactions are more common than remote ones. For > > instance, people on a company LAN or extended network > > tend exchange more interactions with each other than with > > people out on the Internet. Universal access by a > > community to each other's systems is probably of greater > > interest than access to the outside. Nevertheless, > > gateways to selected outside services could be designed. > > > > 3. The Simputer traps users in baby interfaces, so they'll > > never grow into interfaces other people can use. > > > > Answer: design a teaching tool that uses the Simputer to > > help people learn more complex systems. > > > > 4. Technology cannot be introduced in a vacuum. A social > > infrastructure is needed. Thus, introducing $200 > > Simputers into poor areas will just lead to theft. > > > > Answer: This is actually a sophisticated > > argument. Infrastructure is indeed necessary. But if > > somebody thinks a Simputer worth stealing, it has proven > > its value. People in poor areas have other small, > > valuable objects and possess the street smarts to protect > > them. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Andy Oram O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. email: andyo(a)oreilly.com > > Editor 90 Sherman Street voice: 617-499-7479 > > Cambridge, MA 02140-3233 fax: 617-661-1116 > > USA http://www.oreilly.com/~andyo/ > > Stories at Web site: > > The Bug in the Seven Modules Code the Obscure The Disconnected > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ___________________________ > > Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) > > is the oldest non-profit, mass membership organization > > working on social impacts of computer technolo,

2 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] An Interesting Question
by Vinayak Hegde 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

hi, M$ has only fooled few people. It's only that thoose who have been conned do not know that have been conned. A strategy like this is very difficult/impossible due to the architectural differences between windows and linux. BTW do you think that Bill Gate's/M$'s ego will let him do that? or is money more important than the ego?? There have been some attempts to bridge the gap between the applications(eg Lindows.com which runs both M$ and linux apps) :-) ciao Vinayak Hegde __________________________________________________________________________ http://dating.zeenext.com Log on to nextDATE. It's the next best thing to doing it.

2 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] An Interesting Question
by quasar＠vsnl.net 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

lilo(a)zeenext.com wrote >The Internal CodeName for Windows XP was "Cairo". In Greek "Chi" >is written as "X" and Rho as "P" (well roughly). Hence XP in >Windows XP is for Cairo and not X from Xwindows or MacOS. ummm.. interesting information. Now all we gotta do is find a connection between Cairo, the greek language and Micro$oft. It is of course very circumstantial that windowsXP which came after macOSX both have a greater thrust on eye-candy interface and of course the fact that the latest of X can compete with any of the above in the eye-candy aspect. Three windowing systems with X somewhere in their names - now that is something... :-D BTW what seems to be the motivation for these esoteric "internal codenames" which seem to be the norm of the industry..? quasi

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] An Interesting Question
by Vinayak Hegde 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

> M$ already was inspired by the Mac OS X & the various good looking > managers > on X to name the last windows with an 'X' in it. :-) > > quasi The Internal CodeName for Windows XP was "Cairo". In Greek "Chi" is written as "X" and Rho as "P" (well roughly). Hence XP in Windows XP is for Cairo and not X from Xwindows or MacOS. :-) ciao Vinayak Hegde __________________________________________________________________________ http://dating.zeenext.com Log on to nextDATE. It's the next best thing to doing it.

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] An Interesting Question
by q u a s i 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

At 12:30 even 9/26/02 +0530, N Joshibaba wrote: >but the kernel architecture (monolithic / macrolithic / hybrid (?)) of >Windows and Linux is different right ? Also there is difference between >Windows 9x and NT kernel > >AFAIK Linux kernel was written keeping in mind POSIX nd I guess POSIX nd >Windows don't go together AFAIK POSIX is an standard. M$ has full right to be compliant, *if* it so wants to. >Also I think you are assuming that Linux is the *best* kernel available >(BTW what happened to HURD ?) which arguably is not the case right, IMHO. GNU/Linux is the best choice due to its 'open' & 'free' nature. It is under constant and heavy development and one day (soon) may become the best. Stallman wants HURD to be in, but I think it lacks the developer following that Linux has. >I've seem ppl on Usenet (Microsoft Developers well versed with GNU/Linux) >refer to Windows 2000 with reverence. I too think that Microsoft did come >up with something 'stable' with >Windows 2000. Win2K is indeed stable. And, I suppose, a good secure OS to have if one does not mind paying the big bucks and wants professional technical support. The last truly useless piece of junk from M$ was windows95. Even windows98SE is quiet stable (though not as efficient as GNU/Linux and of course completely insecure). >I mean when I look at Windows Xp ; it iz a hybrid of Win 9x and Windows >2000 right? Modified & improved Win ME interface on top of NT kernel. It is all eye-candy than genuine performance improvements, I suppose. M$ already was inspired by the Mac OS X & the various good looking managers on X to name the last windows with an 'X' in it. :-) quasi HSC pass, too! '-)

2 1

Redhat Plans to conquer the desktop??
by Vinayak Hegde 26 Sep '02

26 Sep '02

The VP of RH talks to the register about RH future plans. Thankfully though they have no plans to replace Redmond with redhat http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/27289.html Also there is an article in the Times that LG is planning to sell PCs preloaded with Linux. Also if I remember right there was an AD by compaq (again in the Times sometime back) which showcased two PCs one running Linux and the other windows Both the configs were the same but there was a price difference of nearly rs.7000/- between them. :-) ciao Vinayak Hegde __________________________________________________________________________ http://dating.zeenext.com Log on to nextDATE. It's the next best thing to doing it.

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
17
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Linuxers September 2002